Delta Airlines plane's engine burst into flames shortly after takeoff from Los Angeles
https://abc7.com/post/video-shows-planes-engine-burst-flames-shortly-takeoff-lax/17206825/Open linkView original on lemmy.world248
Comments51https://abc7.com/post/video-shows-planes-engine-burst-flames-shortly-takeoff-lax/17206825/Open linkView original on lemmy.world
If it’s Boeing I ain’t going
That bird is probably older than you are
The 767-400ER was first introduced in September 2000. Where do you get your probabilities, plane expert?
The fact that this plane was built in 2000. The fact that lemmy is representative of Reddit user demographics and their average age is 18-29 making it a reasonable assumption that you are under 25.
No. The FIRST plane was built in 2000. Try again.
You are a fucktard. I know how to look up tail numbers and info just as easy as the next guy. This plane was built in 2000 according to the info available.
Just testing if people will pay extra for a nonexploding plane.
not defending Boeing (proud Airbus fangirl lol) but i see a lot of comments blaming Boeing. think it's an important detail that the aircraft manufacturers don't make the engines. The 767s are powered by General Electric CF6, Pratt and Whitney JT9Ds or RollsRoyce RB211s etc. Boeing didn't make them. also modern airliners have engine fire extinguisher bottles that are activated within the cockpit to put out the fire (the same handle also cuts fuel to the affected engine so the fire doesn't reignite) because the affected engine no longer functions it's best to return to the airport afterwards
Thank you! People love to pile on every time there's a blip in the news. Yes Boeing needs to be restructured and monitored closely for compliance, but so many Boeing related incidents are on the airline for poor maintenance, not manufacturing problems
Also I'd rather fly in a Boeing plane maintained by Alaska Airlines than an Airbus maintained by Delta. Delta is the Boeing of airlines lol
But isn’t Boeing responsible of the maintenance?
the responsibility for maintenance of the engines falls on the airline. occasionally you do get defective parts which are on the manufacturer, such as the Rolls Royce Trent 1000s which had issues with the intermediate pressure (IP) turbine blades being more susceptible to fatigue cracking related to corrosion. that was on Rolls Royce
God, I hate defending Boeing but thank you for fucking saying this.
And then there's all the airlines getting their spares at the flea market (sometimes unwillingly) so there's always the possibility of a surprise that way as well.
Not at all. The airline is responsible for maintenance. Engines may be maintained by the OEM, but these ancient engines, that may not be the case.
This is a lovely opportunity for people to realize corporations don't care about you, it's not just Boeing, every single one of these companies will go as far as they can get away with to maximize profits.
Don't be an Airbus fangirl/boy either, they have better regulations preventing them from being as shitty as Boeing, and they certainly enjoy the better reputation. But corporations are not your friends.
I rather doubt this happened solely because the airline is saving money somewhere. This is an old bird, I bet the engine has 30000 cycles on it. Probably something let loose in the compressor during take off. Nobody was hurt, everyone did exactly as the book says to do. The system worked. Keep investing in sound regulation and keep the airlines accountable for their maintenance and we all get home safely.
Boeing is famous for enshittifying its part manufacturers. Even if it wasn't manufactured by boing, if it is in a boing plane chances are that boing pressured them to make it faster/for cheaper. Which is what leads to all these plane failures.
What are you gonna do? Lose the boing contract and be out of work? Or sacrifice quality to meet boing's demands? This is the only possible outcome.
boing boing
Boeing is a fucking huge problem, defending them is cancer at best.
Was it just surging or like a compressor stall or something? FOD like a bird ingestion or something?
I mean, Boeing has/had quality problems, serious ethical failures, but also birds exist.
(I’m not good at explaining this, maybe should have found an explanation online somewhere instead.) You know those stages of a combustion engine - intake, compression, ignition, exhaust, all happening in sequence in an engine’s cylinders? Turbine engines do them too, but in a straight line and constantly. The front of the engine is obviously intake, but compressor fans do the compression just using fast and powerful fans, no seals or valves needed. Ignition lights everything up, exhaust can just flow out the back. (It flows over some more fan blades that steal some power from the expanding gases and use it to keep the whole thing spinning.)
Unless something goes wrong with the compressor fan blades, that is. If compression is too weak and the ignited air/fuel mixture can flow back out the front of the engine, that’s bad. And yeah, it happens sometimes, with any engine. Almost never with both at the same time. (Both engines failing at once low to the ground is like a once in a generation thing, and yeah it’s really really bad. And really really rare.)
Lotta people on the internet who would disagree with that one buddy
I'm sure an engine would have just as tough of a time with a spy drone as with a hypothetical flying animal XD
I have seen news stories describe engine surges as "bursting into flames" before, but that's not the case here.
The video of the incident shows a small but sustained flame emerging from the bottom-rear of the engine, well below the engine's core.
There was an engine fire but in typical journalistic fashion it was far short of bursting into flames.
Unlikely to be boeing's fault as they don't make the engines, just the airframes.
Edit: An engine surge/compressor stall is the plane's version of a backfire. Big bang and a burst of flames. Very exciting, but very little danger beyond the loss of thrust. This incident wasn't a surge, but the last time I saw mainstream news say an engine "burst into flames" it was.
Better article about this incident
Fun fact, the FAA maintains a public data base about all the reported major issues with an airframe. This plane is reported as tail number N836MH and you can look up all of the service difficulty reports Here.
Isn't delta the one who wants to use a bidding war for seats?
AI. To maximize what you'll pay for a seat.
It sounds like they are already using it to minimize what they pay for maintenance.
I’m not going to fly Boeing. I don’t trust the US to have enforced strong and transparent building standards. EU with Airbus all the way.
Boeing doesn’t make the engines.
I think I will be forgoing air travel for the foreseeable future.
This was little more than an inconvenience for the passengers. The news always uses deliberately alarming language to entice a click. There was an actual engine fire this time, but it was a small one that appears to be out before they landed.
Commercial aviation is orders of magnitude safer than cars. The occasional incident is national news because they are rare. Fatal car crashes happen so often they aren't even newsworthy.
Oh, just a small engine fire. Gotcha. My bad, that’s cool then. And definitely no recent pattern of problems with Boeing planes either, so that’s also good.
The engine is located far from the passenger cabin and it has fire suppression systems that probably put out the fire in flight. They have procedures for this that handled the situation so well they didn't even have to evacuate the aircraft.
Fires are a risk with any combustion engine. Clearly they mitigated that risk effectively since no one was in any real danger
Boeing doesn't make the engines.
So do you want me to compile a list of recent vehicle recalls and the alarming amount of cars that just spontaneously catch on fire?
How about the amount of biking deaths?
If you search up ATC recordings on YouTube you can find that go arounds like this are fairly common. If you're really afraid of Boeing's systemic issues, understandably, avoid flights with Boeing planes and you'd be fine.
That’s pretty much my plan. I also don’t need to fly very often.
An engine fire of any size is a serious emergency, and Boeing's recent safety record should get executives fired if not jailed. That said, commercial aviation remains the safest way to travel long distances. Incidents like this are newsworthy precisely because they are so rare.
Engines have nothing to do with the airframe.
Listen mate. You fly as many Boeing planes as you like. I wish you all the best. I am going to pass.
Just keep your feet on the ground
I can just hear the Trump reprobates advising their supporters....... "If we cut Regulations further, we something something something and MAGA! Fuck the Commies."
It's a good thing that the TSA will be all over this, they'll have the investigation well in ha- What's that? They've had their budget sacked to furnish massive tax cuts for multi-millionaires? /s
TSA ≠ NTSB
Yeah, saying that TSA investigates engine fires is like saying that toll booth operators respond to tire blowouts.
They do??? TIL
*me at a tollbooth later* "Yeah, how much is your tire service?"
Uhhh, I don't know. Gimme like $50 now, and call me if you get a flat?
How's 'bout I give you $100 and you call me if I get a flat?
*me after driving on my rims for 4 miles* "Sure is shakey! Good thing I at least know that I don’t have a flat!"
The neat part is they both got budget cuts! ntsb actually does something but they both got cut
OK, fair. I'll do a brink review of Yankee safety agencies.
the S in tsa is for security. they have nothing to do with safety.
Sounds like a AI pricing problem.